I laughed. I cried. I laughed and cried again. I ooo-ed and awed. I laughed again. I stayed up until 4 in the morning, on a school night, to finish it. And when I did, I closed the book, looked at the ceiling, and said: "Wow."
Seriously- amazing book. Far better than THe Sword of Shannara, and I never, EVER thought I'd say something like that. It's one of those books where you look back at how much you've read and say to yourself, "Wow, has it been 400 pages already?"
I just bought "Stone of Tears" and I'll be starting it this weekend. I'll probably have it finished by Monday.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
::claps hand over own mouth::
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
Is that a good book? I've not read it. And I couldn't get through The Sword of Shannara. I just couldn't!
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
It took me about eight of those books to realize that they sucked. Even after Ick warned me! Maybe they're specially designed towards angsty teens?
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
*head a-splode*
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by MyrddinFyre: It took me about eight of those books to realize that they sucked. Even after Ick warned me! Maybe they're specially designed towards angsty teens?
What books?
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
Possibly. I still think at least the first few were good, but not the best. After a while, they got old, so I stopped reading. I got so used to his style of writing that I could predict what was coming next, so things that were meant to be surprises, weren't. Kinda boring.
Oooo, Icky! You're getting close to 10,000! And Steve! Close to 3,000! Wonder when I'll hit 1,000...
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
Are we talking about the Shannara books?
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
yes.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
Ok, that is what I thought. So, I'm not the only one who thought that that book sucked?
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
I think MyrddinFyre was referring to the Sword of Truth series.
And no, you're not the only one who thought Wizard's First Rule sucked.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
No, I meant The Sword of Shannara. Am I the only one who thought that that sucked? I haven't read the other one.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
I haven't read the Shannara books. Jon Boy's right, I was referring to the Sword of Truth books.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Y'all be nice to Tinros. Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
I don't mean to be mean
The fact that I read so many of the books shows that I liked them a *lot* at one point too.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon: Y'all be nice to Tinros.
I was trying to! Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
There are provocative elements in that series, if for no other reason than the way power and love are related with the being a confessor. I didn't find it nearly as provocative as G.R.R. Martin's work, but Goodkind had his moments, and they were spread throughout the series, so keep on reading.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
I have no opinion on them, and I'm sure you guys were just trying to be honest, but it just seems to me like saying something sucks is kind of a harsh way to put it. I know when someone says that something I like sucks, it hurts my little feelers, and I wish that person had expressed their opinion a little more tactfully.
Now I feel like a dork for being all negative, myself. :/
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Icarus gets a gold star for trying to be tactful. Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
Y'know, I've never understood all the comments about the books sucking. I haven't read the two most recent books because I'm tragically skint, and I haven't read any of the others in a few years, but I have fond memories of all the characters.
Sure, all the weird author's-first-novel type of circumlocutions so that Kahlan's secret wouldn't be revealed to the audience was annoying, and there was all the Ayn Rand influence, but...I still thought it was a pretty darn good series. *shrug*
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
You will never, ever, ever, ever hear me say IRL that something "sucks"... it will piss me off to no end because that is just not a descriptive term and it tends to imply that your opinion is law. I won't really use it online either unless I'm talking about someone being sick or something. But I have a little chip on my shoulder about these books, where in the past I've defended them to no end, and now am realizing that the people (specifically Jon Boy and Icarus) who were trying to tell me otherwise, what they were saying about the books is exactly how I feel about them now. So I a) feel like a tool and b) am sorry for using that term, especially when I hate it so much myself. Caught up in the moment, was I Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
(I, for one, was not particularly offended by the use of "sucks". I just don't really understand it, is all. Then again, I'm not really offended by much, so if you were talking to me, Myr, don't worry about it. )
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I would like to point out that I was talking about The Sword of Shannara, not this other book, Wizard's First Rule.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
Zotto, I offended myself Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
Oh. Well I guess that's alright, then. *grin*
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
::claps hand back over mouth::
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
I thought the first book was decent, though I saw most of the major plot elements coming a mile away. After reading the second, and reading the summaries on the back of a few later ones, I realized that the hero and heroine were going to go through exactly the same kinds of traumas every book: namely, Richard was going to face losing his freedom, and Kahlan was going to be in danger of sexual assault. At that point, I put the series aside. You do that once, it's a plot element; do it more than once, you're jerking your readers about, relying on a crutch, and appealing to rather distasteful prurient interests as well.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
Icky
I noticed that too, Sterling.
Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
Oh, c'mon Ick, just spill already. *laugh*
Another thing I don't understand is why it's such a big deal for people to have different taste in books. What is inherently offensive about disagreeing about a completely subjective experience? I liked the series, Ick and Jon Boy hated it. Cool, we can have an interesting discussion where we share our different points of view and come to understand each other better. It's all very 70's, baby.
Edit: hoo, I'm slow. This was in response to Icarus, obviously. Sterling, I noticed those elements too, but they didn't bug me.
Another Edit: Just to expand a bit, I disagree with you, Sterling, when you say that Goodkind is jerking his readers about with those elements. I think it's more likely that those are just the issues that are important to Goodkind, and so he's naturally going to come up with stories that deal with those similar archetypal elements. I see it as being kinda like how Card is interested in communities and religion and uses stories to explore both; I don't think it's really by any grand design.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
Hehehe. I'm definitely glad I read them, no regrets. I've just... stopped. At this point in my life, I'm not getting out of them what I used to. But I'm stalking this thread like crazy because I'm *very* interested to know why other people liked/didn't like or what their thoughts are in general.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
quote:Originally posted by Zotto!: Another Edit: Just to expand a bit, I disagree with you, Sterling, when you say that Goodkind is jerking his readers about with those elements. I think it's more likely that those are just the issues that are important to Goodkind, and so he's naturally going to come up with stories that deal with those similar archetypal elements. I see it as being kinda like how Card is interested in communities and religion and uses stories to explore both; I don't think it's really by any grand design.
He *might* still have interesting things to say on the subject of freedom or the loss thereof. The threats to Kahlan don't seem like they're meant to inspire thought. They seem more like a greasy Victorian rake looking at you sidelong and leering, "Ooh? Is Kahlan going to get gang-raped _this_ time?..."
If I like the characters, I don't particularly want to go in knowing what's going to happen to them. If I don't, who cares?
Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
Jeez, stop talking so fast, people. *grin*
Well, I found some of the magic-y stuff to be interesting, for one thing; like Irami said, there are some powerful scenes with the confessors. I liked the stuff about the veil, and that slyph thingy whose correct spelling eludes me at the moment.
I don't think the series was particularly ground-breaking, but I care much more if something is good than if it's new and never before seen. And I did appreciate how Goodkind seemed to at least try to make his stories relevant to the real world. Someone like Card, for instance, does much better at this, in my opinion, but I still liked Goodkind's work.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
Speaking of which, I have a huge crush on the blonde red-leather agiel-weilding whatshername friend.
It seems I'm determined to own every other post in this thread. Ahhh, the excitement of Friday night.
edit: phew, zotto got in there before me
Posted by theCrowsWife (Member # 8302) on :
I read the first three of those books. It seemed to me that there was a huge logical inconsistency in the first one, that annoyed me to no end. But it's been several years since I read it, so I can't remember the details well enough to explain it. I suppose I might have been mistaken, but it really bugged me at the time.
--Mel
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Zotto!, it's just that I personally have offended people before on Hatrack by coming into a thread that they start to express their like of something and saying I don't like it. And one or two people have been really offended by it--enough to take it very personally, in fact. And I started a thread asking people what they thought of this behavior, and the reply was mixed.
If one feels that disagreeing with the aesthetic opinion of the thread originator is "crapping all over the thread," is what I'm doing now any better? Of course not. I almost can't help myself, though. Most of my opinions are strong ones, and I come here for discussion, and, like you, I myself don't think it's disrespectful to enter a thread devoted to the liking of something and say you don't like it. (Provided, of course, you don't generalize insultingly about those who see things differently from you, and say something like "Only mindless drones like Disney or live in Celebration, Florida.")
But when I hint at my true feelings about something like Terry Goodkind in a thread like this, I do it in as self-conscious and restrained a manner as I can in the hope that the people who believe this is out of line will cut me some slack in the realization that I'm trying to walk that line, and take their different opinion of what is appropriate into consideration. (Certainly Tinros doesn't seem to be offended. ) But there are one or two people around here who have expressed the opinion that I am a self-righteous prig, and they're likely to see evil in all I do regardless, and so maybe there's no point in even trying, but, then, maybe more than being about what I think is right, this is more of a "once bitten, twice shy" type of dealio. :-p
[/ramble]
Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
Sterling, I don't think I've ever actually been surprised by a single book I've ever read in my entire life (well, no, that's not strictly true, but Card's Pastwatch is the only one I can think of that caught me kinda off-gaurd), so I guess I'm not really bugged when things seem fairly predictable.
I mean, story plots in general are all pretty predictable, and so if Goodkind seems to gravitate toward situations that resonate with him, I'm cool with that. I'm more into the details, the reasons behind things and character interaction.
Again, I disagree that he's going for prurient interest; I think that such situations are the ones that are most powerful to him, and so he's going to write about them and explore them. If we think he's failed in doing so in an interesting manner, that's cool, but I don't think it's some kind of gimmick, really.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
If you're a "self-righteous prig", Icarus (which I'm not in any way saying), and being one has become a crime at Hatrack while I wasn't looking, I suspect you're still a good way down a long list when the sheriff comes callin'.
quote:Sterling, I don't think I've ever actually been surprised by a single book I've ever read in my entire life (well, no, that's not true, Card's Pastwatch is the only one I can think of that caught me off-gaurd), so I guess I'm not really bugged when things seem fairly predictable.
Again, I disagree that he's going for prurient interest; I think that such situations are the ones that are most powerful to him, and so he's going to write about them and explore them. If we think he's failed in doing so in an interesting manner, that's cool, but I don't think it's some kind of gimmick, really.
It's been argued that there's only somewhere between seven and thirteen (depending on who you ask) "original" plotlines. I don't necessarily agree, but even if you accept the premise, I've still read enough authors who at least managed interesting innovations on familiar themes to make it worth the reading. Goodkind, to my mind, doesn't.
(But then, there are readers who faithfully read every book of a certain type that inevitably describes the heroine's violet or green eyes within the first two pages. To each their own... But within the genre, I'd rather look for authors who try to do something new than ones who do the same schtick repeatedly. There's a lot of material out there worthy of consideration.)
We disagree about the prurient thing; okay. But I think it's one thing to make a point within a given "world", and another to make a world that seems to exist, to an extent, to rape innocent young women. How else would you describe the teams that hunted members of Kahlan's order? To recognize that bad people do bad things is one thing; to make a world in which it's a systematic ongoing process is just ugly.
[ January 20, 2006, 11:15 PM: Message edited by: Sterling ]
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
SO am I the only one here who still likes the book? Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
Icky, I'm not necessarily offended, but this has ruined my enjoyment of the series a bit, especially since I just started reading the second book. It's a "I was looking forward to it, but now... I dunno." kind of feelings.
Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
*grin* Thanks for the ramble, Icky. I can totally see where you're coming from, and it's a perfectly respectable position.
There are things I didn't like in the series, as I said earlier, but on balance, I thought it was pretty good. I think people just have different tolerances of the level of predictability in stories; we get bored if it's too predictable, of course, and call it cliche, but it's a totally subjective line.
Posted by AYC (Member # 8859) on :
DEFINATELY KEEP READING SWORD OF TRUTH. Just wait tell you get to "Faith fo the Fallen" One of the best books i have ever read.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
Tinos - I'm sure you're not. And like I said, at some point I was really, really into the books so I definitely understand why you enjoyed the first one. Though, it also took me a lot longer to get those "I don't know" feelings
edit - I am slow and someone already answered for me.
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
Well, by this time, it's rare to find an author that doesn't use something that's cliche. However, there are plenty of authors who can use something generally cliche(like the hero falling for his travelling companion) and make it something all their own. Which I, personally, think Goodkind has done extremely well with, at least in the first book. I'll see what I think after I'm done with the next few.
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
quote:Originally posted by MyrddinFyre: Tinos - I'm sure you're not. And like I said, at some point I was really, really into the books so I definitely understand why you enjoyed the first one. Though, it also took me a lot longer to get those "I don't know" feelings
edit - I am slow and someone already answered for me.
Well, mine have been given a bit of a nudge by the "I really, really didn't like those books" comments. I trust the opinions of the people on Hatrack, and it kind of deters me a bit to recieve quite a few negative comments on a book I highly enjoyed.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
That is one of the things I enjoyed, the relationships between the people. Not necessarily deep, but I enjoyed the banter and watching the friendships evolve.
Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
(Sorry, had to answer the phone, probably missing a ton of new responses...)
I still like it, Tinros. *laugh* And anyway, I don't think you should be basing your opinion on whether you like it or not on what we say; decide for yourself! *grin*
And with that, lovely Hatrackers, I must go to pick up my dad, whose truck broke down twenty minutes from here. Goodnight. Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
Hehheh. My favorite part was the description of the dragon at the end of the book, dancing from foot to foot, clapping her hands, yelling, "It hatched! It hatched!" It reminds me of a little kid who just got their favorite Christmas gift. I read that part at 2 in the morning, and I had to stuff a pillow in my mouth to keep from waking my parents up- I was laughing that hard. Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
Incidentally: they're a little old, but for light fantasy I'd recommend John Moressy's "A Spell For Princess", about a wizard who'd much rather stay home than go out on adventures, and Craig Shaw Gardner's "Wuntvor" series (fluff, but enjoyable.)
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Well, if they're bringing you enjoyment, then what does it matter what I think?
On the other hand, if you enjoy them, you can keep reading them, and then later on we can debate why I don't like them and you do, and that could be an interesting discussion.
And that's what I'm really after when I dissent in these threads. It's not to keep people from reading Goodkind. (Well, okay, maybe a little bit . . . ) It's looking for discussion with people who see things so differently from me. That's what Hatrack is all about, for me.
I'll let you in on a poorly kept secret: I rather like Jordan's Wheel of Time series. Most people dismiss it out of hand as garbage, and I have been forced to acknowledge some of its serious flaws, but despite all that, I still think there's a lot that's really good there. And I have come out and said so, even when some of the posts in the current thread about Jordan come off, to me, as quite a bit more judgmental than those of us here who don't like Goodkind have been. (Or maybe it's just me being sensitive, but there seems to be a strong current of "I don't get how any intelligent person could like this" in the Jordan thread.)
Anyway, my point is that eleven books later, I'm still reading everything Jordan puts out. I'm not letting other people's opinions make me stop liking something. If I come to agree with them on my own (like I share their annoyance at the Jordan books that resolved nothing), then fine. And, if not, then I just figure I see something there that they don't.
So I'm truly sorry if I ruined your enjoyment of the books. That was not my intent. I hope you decide that this was hyperbole, and that your enjoyment is rooted in the effect on you, not in my opinion.
Keep on reading, and let me know if you decide, like Myrd did, that they weren't that great after all, or if, like Zotto!, you think I'm missing the greatness that is Goodkind. 'kay?
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
I still like Wizard's First Rule, Tinros.
I even like "Stone of Tears" and "Faith of the Fallen."
I'm more abivalent about the rest of the series. It felt by the fourth book or so that Goodkind was getting into an ideological rut, and one I don't necessarily agree with on all points. And the sex+violence thing is, for me, really unappetising. I can handle it when it's necessary to the plot, when it's narratively important. But it feels like Goodkind just writes it in gratuitously, and that bothers me.
Masochistic curiosity will see me to the end of the series, but I doubt I'll read anything else by him.
And I totally second Sterling's recommendation of the Kedrigern stories. They are some of the most difficult ones I've hunted, but I'm always rewarded when I stumble across one. I own the novel "The Questing of Kedrigern" and a couple of short stories, of which "A Spell for Princess" is one, I believe. LOVE them.
Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
Oops, wait, I'm still here, and I'm sorry Sterling, I didn't see your edit earlier.
Again, I think all those parts of the story were there to make the point that such actions are, in fact, ugly. For me, I really appreciated the anti-rape sentiment I found when I read it, because at the time I was in highschool, with people all around me who constantly used the word "rape" as an exclamation to juice up their conversation; "Ooh, you got RAPED on that last play, dude."
I thought it was utterly disgusting, and of course being awash in the hormones of high school, sexual politics were even more of an interest than they are now. So I'd argue that the point Goodkind is trying to get across is how ugly such things would be, if they did exist.
K, now I'm done. *grin*
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
Oh, heck, Icky, I'm still gonna read the books. It was just a bit... detering, if I may use the word again, to have someone tell me, "They're all pretty much the same." I don't really know how to express it.
It may be one of those series that I loved and adored the first book but hated the sequels because they were like little clones of the first book. Or, it could be a series like Harry Potter that keeps me watching the clock for the next release date. I still have my "July 16, 2005" bracelet.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
quote: What is inherently offensive about disagreeing about a completely subjective experience?
quote: Zotto!, it's just that I personally have offended people before on Hatrack by coming into a thread that they start to express their like of something and saying I don't like it. And one or two people have been really offended by it--enough to take it very personally, in fact. And I started a thread asking people what they thought of this behavior, and the reply was mixed.
...
I am the last person on the planet to say that there's something wrong with disagreement.
However, I hope we can all realize the difference between saying something that takes the person's feelings into account ('That book isn't really to my taste','I just couldn't get into it', etc) and saying something 'sucks'. To me, unless you know the person you are talking with fairly well, just saying something sucks is going to be insulting to anyone as it implies a kind of intellectual and aesthetic lack in the person who does like whatever it is under discussion.
Also
quote: Icky, I'm not necessarily offended, but this has ruined my enjoyment of the series a bit, especially since I just started reading the second book. It's a "I was looking forward to it, but now... I dunno." kind of feelings.
this happens. I know it's true for me that when I say that I like something and it's met with disdain, it makes it harder for me to like that thing because in the back of my mind I wonder if it really doesn't suck and I catch myself having to work harder just to like it and not invent bad things. I hope that makes sense.
Some of you say that this isn't true for you, that any opinion expressed about something you like doesn't phase you, but I don't know if I beleive that, really. Who doesn't take it personally when someone says that, for instance, the clothes they are wearing suck or are terrible? Is there any difference between clothes and books? I don't think so. If anything, books are held even closer to a book lover's heart than clothes.
This isn't to say that things can't happen in the other direction, of course. I've seen many examples where a criticism phrased in a polite way is taken over sensitively. Icarus, I think, is getting some of that these days.
One more thing while I'm thinking about it. In my experience, the worse offenders, the ones who often say something sucks the most, the ones who seem to delight in 'telling it like it is', are those people who rarely put anything they like out for criticism. I find this annoying. Again, it's not anyone in this thread.
For what it's worth, I just want to say that I appreciate those people on the forum who make threads where they bring things to others' attention because they want to share their love of the subject, or care about the forum's opinion. If the forum is like a potluck dinner, there are certain people who bring little, but seem to otherwise feel free to belittle others who do take the time to bring something to the table. Again, no one in this thread. (As of this writing.) Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
*laugh* Icky, I didn't say you were missing out on any greatness. And like Eaquae, some of the icky stuff is a bit too much for me. I just seem to disagree that it's in there as some sort of gimmick to get masochists to fork over cash; it might not be the most effective way to get the point across to people like us, but I think to Goodkind it's important that ugly things are shown. Some people just have differing tolerances for the stuff.
K, NOW.
Edit: ARGH! Stormy, I want to reply to your post, but I really do have to go. *laugh* I'll be back, though, it's a good post. Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
:-\
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
?
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
* Full disclosure, Tinros, if I wasn't clear: I read the first two and stopped. I don't think I'm incorrect in my asessment, but I could be. Don't let me dilute your enjoyment of the series, if you decide to continue.
* The "Spell for Princess" I read was a novel. It may be he extended the original short story.
* If that's what you get out of "Sword of Truth", Zotto, more power to you. Maybe you have more faith in human nature than I do. But we'll have to agree to disagree.
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
I don't think it's a gimmick, Zotto!. I just don't think it was necessary to describe it in such detail, or in some cases, to be there at all. I'm not going to ascribe a motive as to its inclusion, I just didn't think it needed to be included.
I have no idea, Sterling, about the novel/short story thing. I can never find any of the novels, and I've been keeping an eye out for years. Ohh! Right. I got confused. I have a SS called "A Hedge Against Alchemy," which is apparently the original story, and for some reason (I have NO idea) I got it confused with A Spell for Princess. Sorry. I still agree that they're great, though. Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Just general mixed feelings. See, I think Zotto! and I could have an interesting conversation on our wildly different takes on these books, but not without crapping all over Tinros's enthusiasm.
And your point about clothes and all is true, I think, only insofar as the criticisms come off as criticisms of you. I like a lot of things that are disdained at Hatrack, and don't care for a lot of things that people here love. I like Jordan. I think Star Wars episodes two and three are pretty good movies--especially three. I think LOTR by Tolkein was a brilliant series on the whole, because of the stories, but that, when you get up close, Tolkein is a painfully bad writer. I think the Chris Columbus Harry Potter movies are far better than the Alfonso Cuaron ones. I think the FOTR movie was borderline awful, and that TTT was the best of the series. I think the original Thomas Covenant trilogy is awful. I don't think Adam Sandler and Jim Carrey are in any way funny. I like Matchbox Twenty. I am pro-life.
I don't mind being out of step in all these things. I will get offended if somebody suggests it's because I'm stupid, or superficial, or something personal like that, but I think where we differ is where the conversation gets interesting. But not everybody sees things that way.
And then there's the fact that lately, just being myself is enough to step on toes on Hatrack. (Not in this thread, just a reflection on my general feeling.) I'm not inclined to stop being myself, so where does that leave me?
So,
:-\
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
quote: Just general mixed feelings. See, I think Zotto! and I could have an interesting conversation on our wildly different takes on these books, but not without crapping all over Tinros's enthusiasm.
Come on, Icarus. I doubt Tinros would care.
The point of my post isn't that disagreement is bad, but...(how to put this?)...a blanket condemnation of something as 'bad' or awful is probably bad. In other words, I think it's not what's said so much as how it's said. Isn't this true of most things?
And in looking over this thread and thinking about it for a second, it's not just that so much as there was this string of people at the beginning who were all saying that the book(s) sucked. EVen though I'm sure no one was trying to be mean or was doing it intentionally, I kind of felt like Tinros was being ganged up on.
quote: I don't mind being out of step in all these things. I will get offended if somebody suggests it's because I'm stupid, or superficial, or something personal like that, but I think where we differ is where the conversation gets interesting. But not everybody sees things that way.
You seem to be implying that the issue is just simple disagreement, that some people are o.k. with disagreement and some aren't. I want to reiterate that I really doubt that is the case with Tinros--it's certainly not the case with me. Again, the issue to me mostly isn't what's said, but how it's said. Though of course, there are certain things that criticism of is bound to raise someone's ire no matter how it's approached. I think this is true of everyone.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Okay.
I don't think we're so much disagreeing as talking about different points. (I'm feeling particularly self-absorbed tonight. Must be because it's Friday night.)
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
I'm always self-absorbed. I'm like a big sponge that's filled completely with me. Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
*snerk*
(EDIT: And with that post, I'm signing off for the night. Goodnight. )
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
***SPOILERS*******
I thought the whole section about Richard getting tortured was pretty decent. I didn't care for the rest of the book. I've always thought Goodkind wrote that torture part before he ever came up with the rest of the world and story.
Ironically, I think book 2 and onward are fairly decent. Once Goodkind got that "you have to have the main characters travel to every point on the map by the end of the book" out of his system, he told a pretty good story.
Posted by Nell Gwyn (Member # 8291) on :
I still quite enjoy Wizard's First Rule and Stone of Tears, but all the angst in the rest did get a bit tedious. Not enough to make me hate them, or hate myself for reading them...it's just that all the wallowing in misery got a bit old after a while. But the world and the magical system is still at least mildly intriguing. I'll keep reading them to find out what happens, but it's not a ravening addiction like OSC or G.R.R. Martin. Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
Phew, that was quite a trip. We took an unexpected detour on the way home and saw "Goodnight and good luck" which was decent. I fell asleep in the middle, but that was because I was exhausted, not because I wasn't into it. *grin*
Anyway, where were we?
Stormy: I completely agree with your first big post on this page, and I'm sorry if any of my posts in this thread gave anyone any reason not to think so. I, personally, was not particularly offended when all the sucking talk started, mostly because I'm not particularly offended by much. Rather, instead of feeling insulted, I have this need to try to get people to understand the good bits that I'm seeing in whatever they're poo-pooing.
Music, for instance; I've met very few people whose taste in music is at all similar to mine. They'll point out stuff they don't like about it, and I want to explain to them No, that's not the point of the piece, you're not listening to it the right way to get what I'm hearing. It's physically painful to watch a TV show I enjoy with someone who has the opposite opinion.
Sometimes I'm a little hurt by what people might think of something I love, but what I was trying to say earlier is that if you're really justified in loving it, it should stand up to scrutiny. In most cases, I find that I like it even more after I've tried thinking about it from a different perspective, and I come to understand a little more consciously the elements in it that I appreciate. In other words, we should trust our own judgement, but it doesn't mean it won't be painful sometimes. That's all.
Sterling and Eaquae: "Gimmick" wasn't a well-thought word choice, and I'm sorry for characterizing both of your objections to the books in that way.
What I was trying to say was that while you (and I, in many cases!) don't think that some of the truly nasty scenes were necessary, I don't really see any evidence that Goodkind included them just for the heck of it. I think that he thought they were important and powerful bits that needed to be there. I recieved some of them that way, at any rate. I think that the author and audience just have different thresholds of vicarious pain. *grin*
Ic: Let's see...
I have no opinion of Jordan, having never read anything by the dude. I think Star Wars episodes two and three are pretty good movies--especially three. I think LOTR was a good story, but I was in fifth grade the last time I read the books, so I couldn't tell you what I thought of the writing. I think the Alfonso Cuaron Harry Potter movies were vastly superior to the other ones. I thought RotK was the best movie of the three. Never read Thomas Covenant. I like Adam Sandler in his more dramatic movies and hate everything Carrey has done except the Mask and Eternal Sunshine. I like *some* Matchbox Twenty. I am pro-life.
So, uh, where does that put me? *grin*
And that, my friends, is the end of this post, because I feel a wee bit comatose at the moment. I guess what I'm trying to say is: I'm sorry if I offended anyone, and I'm sorry if I missed replying to something. We all agree and disagree to varying, um, degrees on this sorta junk, and it's valuable and cool to talk about it. To me, anyway. Goodnightm and goodluck.
Oh wait wait: Nell, I totally agree, there are very few addictions as potent as Card, and I'm just getting into Martin and thinking I'll enjoy him. Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
Martin is quite good as far as character development. Even the "evil" chars are seen as more real and complex characters.
I liked the torture/agiel aspect of Goodkind's books, but saw many parallels throughout the series with the wheel of time series, which kind of disturbed me and made the books less potent for me.
The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant had a rape scene in the very beginning, and performed by the "hero" of the series. It was pretty interesting how very flawed the main character was made, yet this was supposed to make him stronger and better able to combat his foes.
I'd be interested in seeing how people rate different fantasy series, and seeing if some series I haven't heard of pop up in that list.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
On the Fantasy Series list? Cause that's a long, long list Posted by kwsni (Member # 1831) on :
i have mixed feelings about this series. I really liked them the first time I read them, and have enjoyed them since, but the writing gets to me, as does the angst. Wizard's First Rule is probly my favorite, followed by Temple of the Winds, whose plotline I always equate to a Buffy episode.
Ni!
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
Wow. Did little old me start a debate?
Ladies and gents, say what you want. I'm just going to be a stubborn teenager and insist on LIKING the books, no matter what you older geezers say!(no offense intended)
So debate away, people. Isn't debate the spice of Hatrack?
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Well, I guess I'm a geezer on hatrack (if over 30 makes one a geezer) and I'll say that I liked Wizard's First Rule too. I would recommend, however, that you borrow the others from the library instead of buying them because the series quickly went downhill for me and I can't say as I think any of the other books are any good. I kept reading them, because they were loaned to me by a family member and I kept thinking they'd get better, but they didn't.
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
Well, Belle, being a teenager, a "geezer" is pretty much anyone over 30. So I guess you count, but in that respected, loving way.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
/Nelson
Ha!Ha!
/Nelson
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
I don't know about controversy, so much as a meta-discussion on what is polite behavior. If I thought anyone currently in this thread were going to really get on my case, I would clam up.
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
Tinros, from this old geezer who's over 50 (gasp!): I really liked the first book, a lot, and I enjoyed the ones that followed. So keep reading. It was the book with the stupid Nazi-style statue of Richard and Kahlan on the cover that totally destroyed the series for me (about the 6th one I think), I HATED that. But, like I said, I'm old. Just enjoy your reading, and don't be put off.
Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
Tinros,
I really enjoyed the books...and have read the series multiple times. As many of the people here know, I am one of the admins over at Goodkind's site (though unlike OSC, he doesn't post himself...he doesn't have an Internet connection).
I actually liked many of the later books better than WFR. Faith of the Fallen was one of my favorite books of all time.
Yes, there is violence in the books, and there are disturbing scenes. Overall, his theme is on individualism, and the importance of protecting your rights. Yes, he uses hyperbole to show the dangers of a collectivist society, and to show the difficulty in fighting fanatics...but I also think he tells a great story.
If you have collectivist leanings, his books will likely piss you off. Some of his "bad guys" are very very bad and do things that will creep you out. Of course, he also has people that start out bad, change to be more sympathetic.
I hope you enjoy Stone of Tears as well. I personally really loved it. I think it is fun to watch Richard work himself out of a tough situation, and have an impact on those around him.
If you are interested in the type of philosophy that Terry has, you might read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. She is/was a major influence on Terry. Her books are a bit more dense, the story is more philosophy based than plot based, but I really enjoyed atlas shrugged.
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
The thing I disliked most about Faith of the Fallen (apart from the preposterous effect of that ridiculous statue on people), was the fact that the book did absolutely nothing to advance the story of Kahlan and Richard. At its end they are in exactly the same position as they are at its beginning. The book is a political tract, nothing more.
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
But at least it was enjoyable to read. "Fallen Empire" had an impact on the larger plot, but man, was it terrible to slog through. I felt like Ayn Rand or whoever he was getting his ideas from was beating me over the head with a club. Not to mention "Pillars of Creation" which was a 600-pg setup for the next book - nothing happens!
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
ugh, Atlas Shrugged. >_< That is the only book I've ever not finished. I was able to get past my OCD with the rationalization that I had already read the same story three times--twice in Atlas Shrugged and once in The Fountainead--and so it was okay to not finish the book.
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
Tinros, I LOVED Wizard's First Rule. When I mentioned the series on here there was a similar (but smaller) uproar, too. I think some people just don't like his politics. *shrugs*
Anyway, I've read *nearly* all the books. I haven't read the latest one or two. The only one I didn't really enjoy was Soul of Fire. I think. Faith of the Fallen was my favorite.
You go right ahead and like the books. Awesome is an apt word for the first one.
-Katarain
Edit: to correct a title.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Icky, tell me you at least got as far as the "John Galt" radio address in Atlas Shrugged. It's the best example of bad writing evar. Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
Well, I just got back from a mall I don't normally go to, and the Walden Books there had a "Science Fiction/Fantasy Sale"- buy three books, get the fourth free. Needless to say, I was quite pleased. I finally found "First Meetings" in paperback, and I got a couple others, including one of the "Forgotten Realms" books and the first book in the "Wheel of Time" series. Don't all gang up on me on that, now- I'm just giving it a try. Anyway, the sale has inspired my reading. Now that I have five new books to read, I shouldn't get bored for... oh, I'll give it a week. Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cashew: The thing I disliked most about Faith of the Fallen (apart from the preposterous effect of that ridiculous statue on people), was the fact that the book did absolutely nothing to advance the story of Kahlan and Richard. At its end they are in exactly the same position as they are at its beginning. The book is a political tract, nothing more.
The statue was really just the culmination of everything. Richard had worked in that community for a while at that time. He had already made quite a change in how people felt. People were already getting restless. The reason Richard got his job was because many of the old stone carvers were executed for refusing to work...and protesting things. The statue was just his gift to them, and what it was destroyed it pushed them just a bit to far.
As for Richard and Kahlan, the main focus is not on the growth of their relationship. That is not what the series is about. It did have an effect on them individually though. It put Kahlan back in command of troops. It also helped Richard to recover from the emotional blow he received in Soul of the Fire.
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
QUOTE As for Richard and Kahlan, the main focus is not on the growth of their relationship. That is not what the series is about. UNQUOTE
I wasn't referring to their relationship, but to the story they are involved in. Nothing happens to advance that. NOTHING. And as far as not liking his politics, as Katarain mentioned, I'm on the conservative side of the political spectrum and actually tend to sgree with the general run of his ideas. I just don't like being belted over the head baseball bat-style with them. It was heavy-handed, unsubtle and crude. Same with Ayn Rand - caricatures rather than characters.
Posted by Dante (Member # 1106) on :
Wizard's First Rule is the kind of book that makes me confused about why I can't get my own stuff published.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dante: Wizard's First Rule is the kind of book that makes me confused about why I can't get my own stuff published.
Indeed.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Icky, tell me you at least got as far as the "John Galt" radio address in Atlas Shrugged. It's the best example of bad writing evar.
I believe that's about exactly as far as I got. (Though I could be wrong, since it's been close to fifteen years.)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
Icky![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)